Too Funny to Fail: Talent vs. Context and Failing Up

By SIOP Member Brandon King

Talent. We individually have it in some ways and organizations seem to want it in all ways. Some leaders lament not being to obtain or retain the right talent (or the right level of talent). Some worry too little about it, and put all their “chips” on culture fit. It is an interesting thought experiment to consider what happens if you completely lean into talent on its own and disregard other factors. Thankfully for us, a group of big-name comedians can give us a vivid picture of the pitfalls of one-sided strategy to building your team and organization.

The long-running NBC late night TV show Saturday Night Live (SNL) is known to many as the pinnacle of sketch comedy. It boasts names of the best in comedy including the likes of Tiny Fey, Amy Poehler, Will Ferrel, Bill Hader, Kate McKinnon, Jane Curtin, Chris Farley, Adam Sandler, Chevy Chase, Eddie Murphy, Steven Martin, and Jim Belushi to name just a few. You likely know those names from things other than SNL as well, as many alum go on to have wildly successful careers.

So, when one of SNL’s biggest stars from the ‘90s left to start his own show, it was highly anticipated and garnered attention from everyone in entertainment. Dana Carvey (known for playing Garth in Wayne’s World, church lady, and his impeccable impressions) was taking the leap to lead his own sketch comedy show called the Dana Carvey Show. Spoiler alert: it was a massive failure in almost every. sense. of. the. word.

This wasn’t, however, for a lack of talent. This show’s cast included Stephen Colbert, Steve Carrell, Robert Smigel, Louis CK, Robert Carlock, and Dino Stamatopoulos (among others). Upon seeing the show, writers from other shows wanted to leave their jobs to work on the Dana Carvey Show. But as outlined in the Hulu documentary “Too Funny to Fail” the comic talent made some critical errors that are instructive to building and leading expert teams. The lessons were around context and expectations.

A Lack of Context

First, the team lacked context. The Dana Carvey Show was built to be edgy comedy written by comedians for comedians. The issue they ran into was that the show did not air on late night TV or an edgy channel. Additionally, it followed a family friendly comedy called Home Improvement on network broadcast television.

In one of the more poignant moments of the documentary, the documentary crew showed an actual TV spot from the ‘90s, in which one of the Home Improvement characters is diagnosed with cancer. Following the dramatic, touching ad it says, “Followed by the Diet Mug Root Beer Dana Carvey Show.” This causes fits of laughter in the former cast members watching it. They could look back and recognize a key lesson: the demographic that was already watching the channel when the Dana Carvey Show began did not match what the Dana Carvey Show provided. The family friendly comedy crowd was not looking for edgy laughs. They hoped to find another all-ages show. The big whiff on understanding the context created incongruencies that could not be ignored for very long.

Incongruent Expectations

As the Dana Carvey Show put together comedy skits that included oddities such as Bill Clinton nursing puppies and skits overtly deriding the ABC executives who made decisions about their show, the audience wasn’t responding. Ratings plummeted and viewers went elsewhere for their entertainment. The issue was that ABC executives wanted the wholesome, accessible comedy that brought in a wide variety of audiences. The Dana Carvey Show was anything but that. But none of this was agreed upon ahead of time. The disparate expectations meant that edgy comedy was on when general audiences were watching.

The stubbornness on both sides meant that at best the show would flounder and never got a chance to show what it could really do. ABC did not ask clearly enough what the show would be like and Dana Carvey assumed he had the green light to do whatever he wanted. It was a situation that was inadvertently set up to fail from the beginning.

Did Anything Go Right?

In short, not much. The show was very short lived and instead of having Mug Root Beer as a sponsor, it had the Chinese food restaurant across the street for its last episode sponsor (literally, that’s not a joke). But the show did have some successful skits, and they began to hit their stride matching the writing to the audience well in its last couple of episodes. Some of the skits would even go on to air or be recurring segments on Saturday Night Live.

As we mentioned before, the show’s short tenure was not due to a lack of talent. Louis CK, Stephen Colbert, Steve Carrell, Robert Smigel, Robert Carlock, and even Dana Carvey himself would go on to have success in comedy for years to come. One of the more successful skits involved two waiters (played by the two Stevens) who were nauseated by food. That skit alone directly got them jobs on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart immediately after the Dana Carvey Show ended.

Many comedians and comic writers actually loved the show for all the odd and edgy comedy they were producing. All the comedians mention and credit their time on the Dana Carvey Show as being a huge part of what launched their careers, despite the huge failure it was at the network level.

So, when you have the chance to build a team and when you are balancing elements of people versus profits remember this:

1. Talent can give your team a high ceiling, but the floor for your team may be set by everything else that goes on around it.
2. Traditional failures can still lead to big success … if the failures are instructive and constructive.
3. Do your best work all the way through the end of each job and phase of your career. It may come in handy later or even land you the next opportunity!

—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About the Author

Brandon King, PhD, is the Principal, People Analyst at Bechtel, where he transforms workforce data into insights that drive better decisions on topics related to employee experience, talent, and leadership effectiveness. He has applied his over 12 years of I-O psychology experience to helping people perform better and be happier across sectors from healthcare to government. His PhD in I-O psychology is from Central Michigan University. Outside of work, he’s follows BYU football, plays guitar, and loves cooking and exploring new places with his family.

—

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology or its affiliates.

If you are interested in submitting an article for Thought Leadership for a Smarter Workplace, email SIOP Senior Brand and Content Strategist Amber Stark at astark@siop.org.